Landed in the Southwest terminal an hour ago. Great to see how busy it is and has been the last couple months, but the baggage and traffic situation is a mess. It was a miss to not renovate and expand the baggage area during the pandemic.
The US is one the few countries in the world that does not allow for sterile international connections, i.e. if you are flying from country y to country x via country z, you do not need to do immigration/customs at z, only at arrival in x.
- 6,119
Your experience will depend on the airline, length of layover, and timing. My connection in Seoul involved an overnight layover, thus I went through the whole nine yards. In Shanghai I've almost always had to transfer between terminals 1 and 2. You can walk between them, but there is no airside connection. You basically have to enter China to get from one to the other, so again, the whole nine yards even if it's just a three hour layover. With China Eastern's new terminal that's not necessary, but you'd have to be arriving on CE or Delta. On anything else it would still be the old game. And even on Delta I had to fill out a landing card declaring the length of my stay, flight numbers, and so forth, and I had to clear a passport check and additional security to enter the airside of the terminal. I can't quite recall if I had to reclaim my bags, but it wouldn't shock me. I've done this so often it gets a bit fuzzy. I'll ask a friend that went with us if you like.) Narita was a little easier in 2020, but I still had to go through security, since I was obliged to claim and recheck my bag. I quite specifically said I LHR was my final destination. I haven't made a connection there. But they're outside the Schengen area now, so the procedures will all be different than they were just last year. Unless you've been through this year nothing any of us recalls really means anything. And they have, what, four terminals? And there are no airside shuttles between them last I checked. Perhaps not everyone will have to clear customs, but some folks surely will. For connections. I cannot believe this won't divert traffic to Paris, Frankfurt, and Schiphol.gregl wrote: ↑Nov 16, 2021This is not quite accurate. I think you are confusing immigration vs. customs.
If you are connecting at LHR, you do not go through customs and immigration - only a security check.
If you are connecting in a Schengen country to another Schengen country - you will go through immigration at your connecting city, but customs at your arrival city.
If you are connecting in a Schengen country to a non-Schengen country - you only go through a security check.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Area
I have connected in Seoul and all I went through was a security check.
I have connected in Tokyo and didn't even have to go through a security check.
Feel free to disregard the Paris comment. It was quite a long time ago indeed. (It was a TWA connection. From well before anyone assumed they'd disappear. And I don't recall everything from that far back entirely clearly anyway.) But the rest applies. LHR has to use different rules now than they did before. Connections will probably be smooth on BA because they more or less own the place and they'll move heaven, earth, and substantial portions of England if necessary. But for any other connection I'd say all bets are off. It'll still work fine for O&D. But they historically had quite a lot of connecting traffic. The EU hasn't seemed inclined to play nice with the Brexiteers. You really think it'll all be unicorns and rainbows? I'm . . . skeptical.
At the risk of dragging this further off topic, I feel like my response misses a fundamental point I was trying to make. Jshank was speculating about the impact of Brexit on LHR and asked if anyone had any experience with making connections at LHR. I was trying to suggest that our experience there doesn't matter unless that experience is quite recent, as LHR is now going to function more like a third country connection on an international flight, where even just last year it was still more akin to a connection in the final country. So a better comparison would be a big Asian hub where third country connections are common.
I'm not really trying to get into the nitty-gritty details of what is customs, immigration, passport control, or just an extra security check. I suspect most of us really don't care anyway. It makes no difference to the end user. The only question is how much inconvenience one must suffer. Honestly, it's not that big a deal, but in my experience (which, while not exhaustive, is nonetheless fairly extensive) it always requires some extra screening of some sort, and frequently that screening is pretty much indistinguishable from what you experience on an international arrival. (Or maybe technically even more, since you might have to go out through customs and then back in through regular security.) If you're expecting this it's no big deal. And when you're itinerary is more than twenty four hours anyway the fact that maybe three of them are spent dealing with an extra layer of screening is not that big a deal. But on a shorter itinerary that extra time might make more of a difference, and maybe that's important to you. Just for giggles I searched AA and Delta for itineraries from St. Louis to Berlin. Because they partner with BA AA connects through LHR. DL, however, connects through Schiphol or DeGaule. The top six results on DL are all quicker than the best result on AA. (And the best is better by almost three hours.) There's probably more to that than just time to clear Brexit, but I can't help but think it's a factor. Especially since the difference is so consistent and so very dramatic and the flights are otherwise relatively similar.
Anyway, I'm way the heck off topic. The important thing is we'd like to have a Trans-Atlantic flight. And given that I'm no longer a fan of basic economy my best hope to get a legacy flight is probably AA to . . . wait for it . . . LHR. (I expect if we get something it will be LCC style, but I hope for better. Even if it's not realistic. I think I'd actually use AA to LHR. After all, the third country connection isn't that big a deal, even if it does add a little time. It'd still probably beat any itinerary with two connections.)
I'm not really trying to get into the nitty-gritty details of what is customs, immigration, passport control, or just an extra security check. I suspect most of us really don't care anyway. It makes no difference to the end user. The only question is how much inconvenience one must suffer. Honestly, it's not that big a deal, but in my experience (which, while not exhaustive, is nonetheless fairly extensive) it always requires some extra screening of some sort, and frequently that screening is pretty much indistinguishable from what you experience on an international arrival. (Or maybe technically even more, since you might have to go out through customs and then back in through regular security.) If you're expecting this it's no big deal. And when you're itinerary is more than twenty four hours anyway the fact that maybe three of them are spent dealing with an extra layer of screening is not that big a deal. But on a shorter itinerary that extra time might make more of a difference, and maybe that's important to you. Just for giggles I searched AA and Delta for itineraries from St. Louis to Berlin. Because they partner with BA AA connects through LHR. DL, however, connects through Schiphol or DeGaule. The top six results on DL are all quicker than the best result on AA. (And the best is better by almost three hours.) There's probably more to that than just time to clear Brexit, but I can't help but think it's a factor. Especially since the difference is so consistent and so very dramatic and the flights are otherwise relatively similar.
Anyway, I'm way the heck off topic. The important thing is we'd like to have a Trans-Atlantic flight. And given that I'm no longer a fan of basic economy my best hope to get a legacy flight is probably AA to . . . wait for it . . . LHR. (I expect if we get something it will be LCC style, but I hope for better. Even if it's not realistic. I think I'd actually use AA to LHR. After all, the third country connection isn't that big a deal, even if it does add a little time. It'd still probably beat any itinerary with two connections.)
- 2,929
STL Biz Journal: Lambert passenger counts neared pre-pandemic levels over Thanksgiving holiday
During this year's 11-day Thanksgiving period, over 180,000 travelers were screened at security checkpoints, compared with 198,649 passengers who cleared security in 2019 and only 82,099 in the 2020 period.
The busiest travel day this year occurred Sunday, Nov. 28, with 20,571 individuals. The last time the TSA screened more than that passenger count was Dec, 27, 2019, with 20,855 travelers passing through the checkpoints, officials said.
- 3,758
I heard something in the 7 AM intro on KMOX 1120 this morning about British Airways and STL. However, I had a meeting and wasn't able to hear what the "news" is on BA/STL. I seem to recall a mention of Indy in this morning's intro. Obviously the BA to Indy story is old news. Is there something new with this story?
I tried to go back and find audio and didn’t see anything. So it must not have been that ground breaking. Really strange they would talk about BA and Indy. Especially since it’s an old story.DogtownBnR wrote: ↑Dec 07, 2021I heard something in the 7 AM intro on KMOX 1120 this morning about British Airways and STL. However, I had a meeting and wasn't able to hear what the "news" is on BA/STL. I seem to recall a mention of Indy in this morning's intro. Obviously the BA to Indy story is old news. Is there something new with this story?
I don’t listen to KMOX but knowing our local media I’d imagine they were simply lamenting Indy getting a flight over St. Louis.
I’d image some UrbanSTL sleuths would have had some scoop on something like that before it hit KMOX.
And for what it’s worth…I’d rather see the region shoot for a mainland European country over the UK anyway.
I’d image some UrbanSTL sleuths would have had some scoop on something like that before it hit KMOX.
And for what it’s worth…I’d rather see the region shoot for a mainland European country over the UK anyway.
And it isn’t even a done deal. It was highly speculated because of a BA as for slots. But They dont have to give it to Indy. It could just be a couple frequencies thrown on JFK.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 07, 2021I don’t listen to KMOX but knowing our local media I’d imagine they were simply lamenting Indy getting a flight over St. Louis.
I’d image some UrbanSTL sleuths would have had some scoop on something like that before it hit KMOX.
And for what it’s worth…I’d rather see the region shoot for a mainland European country over the UK anyway.
It was about BA going to Indy, but with the angle that that means they might take a look at othe Midwestern cites like StL.
St. Louis again included in the Southwest investor presentation saying they are a priority for restoring flights back to pre pandemic levels.
New May schedule up to 107 daily flights. I would expect June's release next Thursday to be up more than that.
![]()
New May schedule up to 107 daily flights. I would expect June's release next Thursday to be up more than that.
That was a wild storm system last night and it appeared that rotation or possible tornado rolled right over the airport. I was watching on planefinder to see how close to the storm they would allow operations when I started following a WN flight from MCO to STL. The bird made it all the way up past I-255 and Route 3 over Illinois, to the point where I could physically see the plane, before she turned south and bolted to BNA to refuel. Another round of flights from TPA, FLL and DFW all arrived around 20 minutes later and they made it into Lambert without much of a delay. The MCO flight didn't make it in until 10:30 or around 3hrs late.
Glad to hear no direct impact at the airport or damages.
Glad to hear no direct impact at the airport or damages.
For totally selfish reasons, do we know when/if YYZ will come back?
I think the May 1 date currently in the schedule is fairly firm.RuskiSTL wrote: ↑Dec 11, 2021For totally selfish reasons, do we know when/if YYZ will come back?
Kansas City says theirs is pretty solid and we had more flights than them so I assume ours is also.
British Airways is restarting their non-stop Pittsburgh-London flights:
https://www.post-gazette.com/business/ ... 2112130055
https://www.post-gazette.com/business/ ... 2112130055
Probably got told to delete. Don’t know why anyone involved in the negotiations would be silly enough to make an announcement on their Twitter accounts.
- 2,929
Didn't see that tweet before it was deleted. Could someone fill me in on what was posted? i.e., I'm inferring that it's STL-Germany; do we know what carrier it would be? Thanks
Tweet said: Who's ready for some good news? Non-stop service on a legacy carrier from STL to Germany coming soon...all I can say at this time. Formal announcement tomorrow. As a ex officio member of the Port Authority, I'm proud of the work they've done to support this project.gone corporate wrote: ↑Dec 13, 2021Didn't see that tweet before it was deleted. Could someone fill me in on what was posted? i.e., I'm inferring that it's STL-Germany; do we know what carrier it would be? Thanks
- 8,907
gone corporate wrote:Didn't see that tweet before it was deleted. Could someone fill me in on what was posted? i.e., I'm inferring that it's STL-Germany; do we know what carrier it would be? Thanks
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk